Amendment 1 - Responses to Inquiries.pdf

Amendment #1 Responses to Inquiries

Solicitation Number: 2027000036

Solicitation Name: Department of Revenue – Identification of Administrative Costs

Published: August 26, 2026

This document contains inquiries submitted by companies within the timeframe specified in the above solicitation. The inquiries are restated verbatim as submitted by the company, with the exception of identifying information.

# Solicitation Reference Inquiry Response

1 Appendix A Appendix A describes the need to allocate costs to the four consolidated cash funds.

DOR has other divisions that may not fall under the four funds. Is the purpose of the project to allocate administrative costs across all divisions (e.g., Gaming or Racing) or only to services covered by the four cash funds?

The project is only Department of Revenue (State) costs applicable to the fees collected by the State for those four funds.

2 Appendix A, Section II.A, "General," first paragraph and numbered items 1-4

(pp. 1-2); and Section

II.C, "Final Deliverable," paragraph beginning "The final expected deliverable..." (p. 5).

Please confirm the required unit of analysis for the cost model and final recommendations. Should the vendor calculate and present costs and recommended cost-recovery amounts at (a) each of the four consolidated cash-fund levels, (b) each underlying fee or charge within those funds, including applicable

Clean Transit, Wildlife, Land Remediation, The State confirms b) by presenting State costs for each fee collected by the State within those funds.

and Enterprise fee components, or (c) both levels?

3 Appendix A, Section II.A, "General," paragraphs beginning "The vendor will conduct an exhaustive review..." and

"The vendor will map processes..." (pp. 2-3);

Section II.D.2, "State

Resources" (p. 5); and DQ

Section IV.C.4(c), "Scope of Work" (p. 9).

To support a consistent level of effort and price across proposals, please provide the

State's current estimate of the number of in-scope operating units, discrete business processes, subject-matter experts, and observational interview or process-walkthrough sessions. Please also confirm whether these activities are expected to be conducted onsite, remotely, or through a hybrid approach, and identify any required State locations.

Appendix A, Section II. A has been modified.

The number of observational interview or process-walkthrough sessions will be determined by the vendor when developing the project plan.

The State is seeking quotes proposing where and how activities are to be conducted. Preference would be for remote. The State has a location in

Denver if the vendor requires an onsite meeting.

4 Appendix A, Section

II.B.2(a)-(c), "Cost

Modeling & Methodology

Development" (p. 4); and

Section II.C, "Final

Deliverable," paragraph beginning "The final expected deliverable..."

(p. 5).

For the statutory authority verification task, does the State expect the vendor to provide an independent legal opinion, or a documented statutory and cost-recovery analysis for review and approval by

Department counsel or the Attorney

General's Office? Please identify the State party responsible for resolving ambiguous statutory interpretations and approving determinations regarding allowable and excluded costs.

The State does not expect a legal opinion. The applicable State staff will review the vendor’s documented statutory and cost-recovery analysis.

The State does not anticipate the need for review or approval by the Attorney General’s Office.

5 Appendix A, Section

II.B.1(a)-(c), "Statutory

Authority Verification" (p.

3).

Given that the vendor will not receive direct, unmonitored access to Federal Tax

Information or Personally Identifiable

Information, please describe the approved methods for reviewing GenTax workflows and obtaining data, such as supervised demonstrations, screen sharing, Reviewing GenTax workflows in remote meetings discussing the process with subject-matter experts and screen sharing in the meeting when appropriate. The vendor will have to request queries for data from the State.

The State anticipates a model with zero independent system access; onboarding

State-executed queries, or de-identified extracts. Please also identify background-check, security-training, system-access, and scheduling requirements, including typical onboarding lead times.

requirements are streamlined down to basic criminal and identity background checks alongside executed NDAs and acceptable use agreements. No user credentials, accounts, or corporate software access will be provisioned, as all system interaction occurs entirely via live collaboration or physical shadowing controlled by the internal expert. Total lead time 1 to 1.5 weeks aligned with the internal calendar availability.

6 Appendix A, Section II.A, "General," paragraph beginning "The vendor will map administrative workflows..." (p. 3); and

Section II.D.1-2, "State

Resources" (p. 5).

For tax-system modification, maintenance, and support costs, should the cost model include actual historical costs, current ongoing costs, planned future modifications, or all three? What supporting documentation and fee-level usage information will the

State make available, such as vendor contracts, invoices, change requests, project records, and maintenance-cost allocations?

Current costs and estimated future known costs. All the supporting documentation mentioned is available from the State.

7 Appendix A, Section

II.B.2(d), "Cost Modeling

& Methodology

Development" (p. 4).

Please confirm whether the annual adjustment framework must be delivered only as a documented methodology in the narrative report or also as a State-operable model with formulas, data inputs, controls, user instructions, and knowledge transfer.

Please also specify the required Consumer

Price Index series and base period and the definitions of "accounts open" and "returns filed" to be used from GenTax.

Appendix A, Section II, C. has been modified.

8 Appendix A, Section

II.B.3(a)-(b), "Annual

Adjustment Framework"

(pp. 4-5); and Section

II.C, "Final Deliverable," paragraph beginning "The final expected deliverable..." (p. 5).

Please clarify the anticipated project schedule from the desired November 18, 2026 start date through final completion before June 2027, including target dates for data availability, draft cost model, draft report, State and legal review, final report, and presentation. How many review and revision cycles should vendors assume, what constitutes final acceptance, and should the potential slide deck and presentation be included in the base scope and proposed price?

The State expects the vendor to propose these items in the project plan. (refer DQ Section IV.C.4

(a) and (b), "Scope of Work")

9 DQ Section I.D, "Schedule of Activities," item 6 (p.

6); DQ Section IV.C.4(b), "Scope of Work" (p. 9);

Appendix A, Section II.C, "Final Deliverable" (p. 5);

and Section II.E, "Timeline" (p. 5).

Please clarify the anticipated project schedule from the desired November 18, 2026 start date through final completion before June 2027, including target dates for data availability, draft cost model, draft report, State and legal review, final report, and presentation. How many review and revision cycles should vendors assume, what constitutes final acceptance, and should the potential slide deck and presentation be included in the base scope and proposed price?

Refer to response to inquiry #8

Amendment #1 includes the following modified documents attached in Colorado VSS as separate attachments:

● Appendix A - Task Order One: Background and Scope of Work - Modification 1